tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post4740974960474115882..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: #paleoamericanodyssey tweets on 24,000-year old Mal'ta SiberianDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger133125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-16014243933492523232013-12-25T13:15:32.649+02:002013-12-25T13:15:32.649+02:00terryt wrote,
"They might not either. I know...terryt wrote,<br /><br />"They might not either. I know Maju disregards 'private lineages' but I believe they are extremely interseting in their own right. In many cases they probably represent lineages once more common than they are today."<br /><br />They might represent ancient lineages that once have been more common than they are today...or they might represent some descendants of that one sampled individual's father or grandfather. It is not possible to disprove either of these two hypotheses with only a singleton, so, for scientific purposes, the SNP is not informative unless and until it has been detected in another individual.<br /><br />"That cautionary element would also apply to the single individuals you list within the 'southern' C3."<br /><br />No, it would not apply (unless you have intended to limit the scope of your comment to M407 or my hypothetical "proto-C3e," and even then only in the context of the limited data from the 1000 Genomes Project/HGDP). Even in that limited data set, C3e-F2613/Z1338(xC3e1-Z1300) has been found in several individuals of unrelated ethnicity (Thai, Vietnamese, and Japanese) in Yunnan, Vietnam, and Japan, and C3e1-Z1300 (which includes M407) has been found in several individuals of unrelated ethnicity (Han, Bengali, and Japanese) in Beijing, Bangladesh, and Japan. This means that "Southern" C3 (C3e-F2613/Z1338) is distributed through a wide and ethnically diverse area that extends to the southwest at least as far as Bangladesh, to the southeast at least as far as Ho Chi Minh City in southern Vietnam, to the northwest at least as far as Beijing in northern China, and to the northeast at least as far as Tokyo in eastern Japan. That is much more informative than any clade that is represented in the literature by only a single individual.<br /><br />By the way, just in case anyone might have failed to notice: I have produced my "time slice analysis" by separating the TMRCA estimates of various clades published by Yan et al. (2013) into groups in which the 95% confidence interval of each TMRCA estimate overlaps to some extent with the 95% confidence interval of every other member of the group. In other words, they represent groups the order of appearance of whose constituent clades we cannot be certain, but that can be confidently placed in chronological order relative to every other group.Ebizurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16925110639823856429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-21591662374759664762013-12-25T08:18:08.258+02:002013-12-25T08:18:08.258+02:00Thanks for taking the time to provide all that dat...Thanks for taking the time to provide all that data. <br /><br />"F-M89 and C-M130 are each almost as closely related to DE-YAP as they are related to each other". <br /><br />That makes sense. <br /><br />"for about one third of the time between the split of CF and DE and the present, F-M89 produced only one line of direct patrilineal descent that has persisted to the present day. After this long span of time had passed uneventfully, F-M89 appears to have produced a myriad of descendant lines in quick succession, almost simultaneously" <br /><br />Which suggests F did not take part in the C, D, E expansion. In other words it was probably 'trapped' for a considerable time in the region CT had reached soon after its exit from Africa. <br /><br />"It seems likely to me that Yan's Northern (F1396) subclade of C3-M217 is roughly equivalent to ISOGG C3b-L1373, which includes North American C3b1-P39 and North Asian (mainly Tunguso-Turkic) C3b2-M48". <br /><br />That is the conclusion I came to. <br /><br />"The other subclades of C3-M217 that you seem to be troubled about are very minor or singleton-type ('private') clades that have been found in Japan or China IIRC, so they might turn out to belong to the 'Southern' branch of C3-M217" <br /><br />They might not either. I know Maju disregards 'private lineages' but I believe they are extremely interseting in their own right. In many cases they probably represent lineages once more common than they are today. <br /><br />"SNPs that have been found in single individuals (like M93 and P62 IIRC) are not really informative (you can't track the individual's history; his patrilineal ancestor might have immigrated from anywhere in a quite recent era)". <br /><br />That cautionary element would also apply to the single individuals you list within the 'southern' C3. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-35866075455968260312013-12-23T11:35:14.802+02:002013-12-23T11:35:14.802+02:00(Continued...)
Note that the linkage between C-M1...(Continued...)<br /><br />Note that the linkage between C-M130 and F-M89 is very weak (or brief); F-M89 and C-M130 are each almost as closely related to DE-YAP as they are related to each other.<br /><br />Then, for about one third of the time between the split of CF and DE and the present, F-M89 produced only one line of direct patrilineal descent that has persisted to the present day. After this long span of time had passed uneventfully, F-M89 appears to have produced a myriad of descendant lines in quick succession, almost simultaneously (G-M201, H-L901, I-M170, J-M304, NO-M214, P-M45, etc.).<br /><br />C3-M217 initially splits into C3-F1144 (equivalent to ISOGG C3e-Z1338, which includes Z1300, which includes M407) and C3-F1396 far back in the "Era of the Initial Diversification of NO-M214" or "Era of the Initial Diversification of O-M175 and the Initial Diversification of P-M45." However, each of the two primary subclades of C3-M217 does not internally diversify until much, much more recently (Mesolithic/Neolithic). It seems likely to me that Yan's Northern (F1396) subclade of C3-M217 is roughly equivalent to ISOGG C3b-L1373, which includes North American C3b1-P39 and North Asian (mainly Tunguso-Turkic) C3b2-M48.<br /><br />The other subclades of C3-M217 that you seem to be troubled about are very minor or singleton-type ("private") clades that have been found in Japan or China IIRC, so they might turn out to belong to the "Southern" branch of C3-M217 (ISOGG C3e-M546/Z1338/F2613). I am unsure whether they already have been tested for any of the SNPs for ISOGG C3e. SNPs that have been found in single individuals (like M93 and P62 IIRC) are not really informative (you can't track the individual's history; his patrilineal ancestor might have immigrated from anywhere in a quite recent era).<br /><br />By the way, in contrast to the North American distribution of C3b1-P39 and the North Asian distribution of C3b2-M48, the 1000 Genomes Project and HGDP samples include representatives of C3e-F2613/Z1338(xC3e1-Z1300) in a closely related pair of Dai (ethnic Thais) in Xishuangbanna, Yunnan, a Kinh (ethnic Vietnamese) in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, and a Japanese in Tokyo, Japan. C3e1-Z1300(xC3e1a-M407) is found in three Han in Beijing and a Bengali in Bangladesh. C3e1a-M407 is found in a Japanese in Tokyo, Japan. There is also a Han from Hunan or Fujian in southern China who appears to be outside of both C3b-L1373 and C3e-F2613/Z1338, but who I suspect is probably a representative of a sort of "proto-C3e."Ebizurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16925110639823856429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-31382937119092470452013-12-23T11:26:18.077+02:002013-12-23T11:26:18.077+02:00terryt wrote,
"Of course this phylogeny was ...terryt wrote,<br /><br />"Of course this phylogeny was not available when I made my comment above. Perhaps you have contributed to this phylogeny?"<br /><br />No, I have not contributed to the construction or publication of that phylogenetic tree.<br /><br />terryt wrote,<br /><br />"I'm having trouble reconciling the ISOGG and the Y-tree I linked to above. The big split you mention is, in ISOGG, obviously C3b-L1373 and C3e-M546. But that leaves ISOGG's C3a-M93, C3c-P53.1, C3d-P62 and C3f-JST002613-27 not assigned to either main group. Do you think these are genuinely independent or do they actually belong to one of the two main C3 clades?"<br /><br />Please consider my "time slice" (to borrow a term from Eurologist) analysis of the data from Yan <i>et al.</i> 2013:<br /><br />"Era of the Common Ancestor of Modern Greater Eurasian Y-DNA"<br />TMRCA of CF-P143 and DE-YAP: 54,100 [95% CI 50,600 to 58,200] YBP<br />TMRCA of F-M89 and C-M130: 54,000 [50,100 to 58,000] YBP<br /><br />"Era of the Initial Diversification of F-M89"<br />TMRCA of IJK-M523 and G-M201: 35,800 [33,300 to 38,300] YBP<br />TMRCA of NO-M214 and P-M45: 33,000 [30,900 to 35,200] YBP<br /><br />"Era of the Initial Diversification of NO-M214"<br />TMRCA of N-M231 and O-M175: 30,000 [27,900 to 32,000] YBP<br />TMRCA of C3-F1144 and C3-F1396: 25,900 [22,500 to 29,400] YBP<br /><br />"Era of the Initial Diversification of O-M175 and the Initial Diversification of P-M45"<br />TMRCA of C3-F1144 and C3-F1396: 25,900 [22,500 to 29,400] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3-M122 and O1'2-F75: 24,700 [23,000 to 26,500] YBP<br />TMRCA of Q-M242 and R-M207: 24,100 [21,500 to 26,700] YBP<br />TMRCA of O1a-M119 and O2-M268: 23,400 [21,600 to 25,300] YBP <br />TMRCA of O2a-F1462 and O2b-M176: 21,500 [19,500 to 23,600] YBP<br /><br />"Era of the Initial Diversification of O3a-M324"<br />TMRCA of O2a-F1462 and O2b-M176: 21,500 [19,500 to 23,600] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3a1-KL1 and O3a2-P201: 18,900 [17,300 to 20,300] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3a2b-M188 and O3a2c-P164: 18,100 [16,600 to 19,600] YBP<br /><br />"Era of the Initial Diversification of O3a2-P201 and the Initial Diversification of N-M231"<br />TMRCA of O3a1-KL1 and O3a2-P201: 18,900 [17,300 to 20,300] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3a2b-M188 and O3a2c-P164: 18,100 [16,600 to 19,600] YBP<br />TMRCA of N-F1206 and N-F2930: 15,800 [13,800 to 18,000] YBP<br /><br />"Era of the Initial Diversification of O3a2c-P164 and the Initial Diversification of N-M231"<br />TMRCA of O3a2b-M188 and O3a2c-P164: 18,100 [16,600 to 19,600] YBP<br />TMRCA of N-F1206 and N-F2930: 15,800 [13,800 to 18,000] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3a2c1-M134 and O3a2c2-N6: 15,500 [13,900 to 17,100] YBP<br /><br />"Era of Diversification of N-M231, O3a1-KL1, and O3a2c1-M134"<br />TMRCA of N-F1206 and N-F2930: 15,800 [13,800 to 18,000] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3a2c1-M134 and O3a2c2-N6: 15,500 [13,900 to 17,100] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3a1a-002611 and O3a1b-F964: 13,900 [12,500 to 15,400] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3a2c1a-M117 and O3a2c1b-F444: 13,300 [11,800 to 14,900] YBP<br /><br />"Era of Diversification of O3a2c1-M134, O3a1a-002611, and O1a-M119"<br />TMRCA of O3a2c1a-M117 and O3a2c1b-F444: 13,300 [11,800 to 14,900] YBP<br />TMRCA of O3a1a1-F11 and O3a1a2-F449: 11,200 [9,800 to 12,500] YBP<br />TMRCA of O1a1-P203 and O1a2-M110: 10,400 [8,400 to 12,400] YBP<br /><br />"Era of the Chinese Neolithic Expansion"<br />TMRCA of O-F11: 6,800 [5,900 to 7,800] YBP<br />TMRCA of O-F46: 6,500 [5,500 to 7,500] YBP<br />TMRCA of C3e1a-M407 and C3-F1144(xM407): 6,500 [5,200 to 7,900] YBP<br />TMRCA of O-M117: 5,400 [4,100 to 6,700] YBPEbizurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16925110639823856429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-31723946282680964172013-12-23T02:02:21.864+02:002013-12-23T02:02:21.864+02:00I've found Dienekes' post on the subject: ...I've found Dienekes' post on the subject: <br /><br />http://dienekes.blogspot.co.nz/2012/07/estimating-age-of-y-chromosome-adam_30.html<br /><br />And the C1-C3 split date specifically at his update: <br /><br />http://dienekes.blogspot.co.nz/2012/08/dates-of-major-clades-of-y-chromosome.html<br /><br />"C3-M217 is a very old haplogroup, with not only an ancient split from the ancestor of the other extant branches of haplogroup C, but also an ancient internal split into one branch that has been found almost exclusively in 'northern' populations (Mongols, Manchus, etc.) and another branch that has been found widely throughout eastern (and southeastern) Asia, including some cases from the Altay-Sayan-Baykal area of northern Asia". <br /><br />I'm having trouble reconciling the ISOGG and the Y-tree I linked to above. The big split you mention is, in ISOGG, obviously C3b-L1373 and C3e-M546. But that leaves ISOGG's C3a-M93, C3c-P53.1, C3d-P62 and C3f-JST002613-27 not assigned to either main group. Do you think these are genuinely independent or do they actually belong to one of the two main C3 clades? terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-15625903488743540762013-12-22T11:10:32.377+02:002013-12-22T11:10:32.377+02:00"I have neither seen nor heard of any researc..."I have neither seen nor heard of any research that suggests that C1-M8 has diverged from C3-M217 more recently than it has diverged from C5-M356 or C6-V20". <br /><br />I was thinking of a paper on the age TMRCA of various Y-DNAs where CF was placed at 56,000 years ago and C1-C3 at 35,000 years go. This is obvioulsy more recent than the C4-C3 split if, as seems very likely, C reached Australia some 45,000 years ago. Unfortunately I can't find the paper at present. The following phylogeny seems to agree with what you've written but makes a simple split between C3 and C1 very unlikely: <br /><br />http://www.phylotree.org/Y/tree/<br /><br />Of course this phylogeny was not available when I made my comment above. Perhaps you have contributed to this phylogeny? terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-24850086851968026212013-12-22T08:32:01.260+02:002013-12-22T08:32:01.260+02:00terryt wrote,
"Yes. But C3 in East Asia was ...terryt wrote,<br /><br />"Yes. But C3 in East Asia was already differentiating autosomally from C4 in Australia, C5 in South Asia, C2 in Wallacea and C* in South China/SE Asia. And possibly C1 was forming in Japan, although some research suggests it branched off C3 some time more recently."<br /><br />I have neither seen nor heard of any research that suggests that C1-M8 has diverged from C3-M217 more recently than it has diverged from C5-M356 or C6-V20. C1-M8 has diverged from European C6-V20, South/Central/West Asian C5-M356, and perhaps also Wallacean/Oceanic Austronesian C2-M38 more recently than it has diverged from C3-M217.<br /><br />Furthermore, you should take care to remember that C3-M217 is a very old haplogroup, with not only an ancient split from the ancestor of the other extant branches of haplogroup C, but also an ancient internal split into one branch that has been found almost exclusively in "northern" populations (Mongols, Manchus, etc.) and another branch that has been found widely throughout eastern (and southeastern) Asia, including some cases from the Altay-Sayan-Baykal area of northern Asia. This split between "exclusively northern" C3-M217 and "ubiquitously Eastern Eurasian" C3-M217 has occurred in roughly the same era as the earliest attested split within P-M45 (between Q-M242 and R-M207) and the earliest attested split within O-M175 (between O3-M122 and O1'2-F75).<br /> Ebizurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16925110639823856429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-47893206848724040342013-11-21T05:41:59.417+02:002013-11-21T05:41:59.417+02:00Well, well, well. Check this out:
http://blogs....Well, well, well. Check this out: <br /><br />http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/11/long-first-age-mankind/#.Uo0eOcSkrIU<br /><br />"I do not how you can reconcile the idea that the ancestors of Native Americans passed through uninhabited regions with the idea that they were however gradually and progressively absorbing Eastern mtDNA from East Asian Mongoloids". <br /><br />Here's what Edward Vajda is quoted as saying: <br /><br />"The gist of his argument is that ca. 15kya, there was a population in south central Siberia that developed a micro-blade technology, which proved to be a 'killer app' that allowed for rapid expansion. This group probably spoke Proto-Dene-Yeniseian (or, at least, the PDY speakers were early adopters). Male-only groups formed the leading edge of this expansion, absorbing existing female lineages in northeastern Siberia; these groups were the first to cross Beringia into the New World, bringing with them the non-Dene-Yeniseian languages spoken by most Indians. Meanwhile, the core micro-blade population, including males and females, expanded more gradually into the whole of Siberia. After thousands of years, one of these Dene-Yeniseian-speaking groups crossed the Pacific and settled what’s now the Pacific coast of Canada; this was the originally Athabaskan-Eyak-Tlingit population". <br /><br />Seems I'm not alone thinking that way. And, of course, I have to make sure you've all seen this: <br /><br />http://dienekes.blogspot.co.nz/2013/11/ancient-dna-from-upper-paleolithic-lake.html<br /><br />Quote: <br /><br />"Similarly, we find autosomal evidence that MA-1 is basal to modern-day western Eurasians and genetically closely related to modern-day Native Americans, with no close affinity to east Asians ... Furthermore, we estimate that 14 to 38% of Native American ancestry may originate through gene flow from this ancient population". terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-65718407875281051702013-11-21T02:26:47.056+02:002013-11-21T02:26:47.056+02:00"It should be clear by now that you and I won..."It should be clear by now that you and I won't reach consensus on this issue" <br /><br />Yes. I'm reminded of Hamarfox's comment above. <br /><br />"there was only one paleo-Mongoloid group/ culture available for admixture" <br /><br />I agree absolutely. And I'll get back to that. <br /><br />"in such an old population, tools like Admixture will always make them look pure and unadmixed - that carries little meaning by itself" <br /><br />Correct. <br /><br />"I do not how you can reconcile the idea that the ancestors of Native Americans passed through uninhabited regions with the idea that they were however gradually and progressively absorbing Eastern mtDNA from East Asian Mongoloids". <br /><br />I can't see where you see the problem. Surely as the ancestors of Native Americans expanded through uninhabited regions they would have filled all the available habitat. At the southern margins of that habitat they would have encountered eastern groups who had already reached the northern limit of their own expansion. In fact the eastern people probably occupied habitat that the incoming people would have regarded as preferable to what they were actually expanding through. <br /><br />"I do not understand why so many people want to have Mongoloid yDNA NO to have developed in the south in the middle of Australoids and Negritos" <br /><br />That is certainly not the scenario I envisage, although Onur seems to see things that way. To me it is obvious that NO developed somewhere north of at least the Middle Yellow River. Y-DNA O later moved back south through regions occupied by Australoids and Negritos. <br /><br />"the vector of traits that can in many cases be understood as an adaptation to the cold northern climate". <br /><br />I am sure both the Mongoloid phenotype and NO haplogroups expanded from some region to the northwest of the Middle Yellow River. And (surprisingly??) that is exactly the region the authors of the paper on the subject postulated to be geographic origin of the EDAR370A mutation. Even more interesting is this: <br /><br />"The human fossil remains of the Ordos Man from Salawusu site dated between 50,000 and 35,000 BCE show strong Mongoloid features, specifically on the fore-tooth and occipital bone". <br /><br />And carried the EDAR variation? <br />That is exactly where we would expect to find such a fossil human, and fits exactly my comments above. See: <br /><br />http://archaeology.about.com/od/sterms/g/salawusu.htm<br /><br />"The Salawusu site is located in Ordos, Nei Menggu (Inner Mongolia), China. Excavated in 1922, the site is an early Homo sapiens site, where bone fragments named Ordos Man have been dated between 50,000 and 37,000 years old". <br /><br />It is almost in the centre of the EDAR gene's geographic origin. Right in the northern loop of the Yellow River. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-21627309453524042052013-11-20T21:26:34.060+02:002013-11-20T21:26:34.060+02:00I do not how you can reconcile the idea that the a...I do not how you can reconcile the idea that the ancestors of Native Americans passed through uninhabited regions with the idea that they were however gradually and progressively absorbing Eastern mtDNA from East Asian Mongoloids.<br /><br />Then I do not understand why so many people want to have Mongoloid yDNA NO to have developed in the south in the middle of Australoids and Negritos and yet to be the vector of traits that can in many cases be understood as an adaptation to the cold northern climate. <br /><br />BTW, according to Wikipedia, the Ordos culture [in North China] is documented from the Upper Palaeolithic. The points and sides of their tools indicate a "Moustero-Levalloisian" element. They seemed to have a masterful knowledge of Upper Palaeolithic technology, producing blades as much as fifteen centimeters long. The human fossil remains of the Ordos Man from Salawusu site dated between 50,000 and 35,000 BCE show strong Mongoloid features, specifically on the fore-tooth and occipital bone. <br /><br />Ordos man and Ting-ts’un man also had shovel shaped incisors.<br />Kristiinahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02994105875605082112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-17848068041609678882013-11-20T15:28:09.943+02:002013-11-20T15:28:09.943+02:00For clarity, from now on I will say "paleo-no...<i>For clarity, from now on I will say "paleo-northern Mongoloids" and "paleo-southern Mongoloids" rather than "northern Mongoloids" and "southern Mongoloids".</i><br /><br />Onur, that is getting closer to my terminology. Except that I think that autosomal DNA indicates that Native-Americans-to-be separated in NE Siberia and Beringia 35,000 - 15,000 ya, and as such, at the beginning of this process, there was only <i>one </i> paleo-Mongoloid group/ culture available for admixture - the split you are indicating happening later, albeit near simultaneously, in part due to this admixture.<br /><br />Also, in such an old population, tools like Admixture will always make them look pure and unadmixed - that carries little meaning by itself, because we have too few ancient reference populations (ancient DNA).eurologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03440019181278830033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-75454534923169469962013-11-20T12:31:37.259+02:002013-11-20T12:31:37.259+02:00This comment has been removed by the author.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-48482069859028304112013-11-20T04:32:02.050+02:002013-11-20T04:32:02.050+02:00"O starts spreading in China and arrives to t..."O starts spreading in China and arrives to the North Asia very quickly". <br /><br />I'm sure the major part of O's expansion is Neolithic. But that expansion is from north of the Yangtze River. <br /><br />"Before the Ice Age NO and O go up to the Baikal area with mtDNA C and A and develop Mongoloid traits together with yDNA C3 and mtDNA B and yDNA D and mtDNA D". <br /><br />Y-DNA O was yet to differentiate from NO, and perhaps the movement was not as far north as the Baikal region. <br /><br />"Circa 35.000 years ago yDNA Q-M120 brings the Upper Palaeolithic Technique to China and again leaves behind its original women and mixes with women carrying Eastern mtDNA. These Q-M120 people never make it to America". <br /><br />I suspect Q-M120 arrived pretty much with Q-L56 although the latter may have been a more northerly group. Just the latter made it to America. <br /><br />"The mainstream Q is heading to Baikal and meets Mongoloid yDNA C3, D and NO people. YDNA Q passes over the earlier inhabitants. Before the onset of the Ice Age, YDNA Q presses on to Beringia and again leaves behind mtDNA X and takes along women carrying D, C and A lines. (I conclude that Eastern women were prettier as they are always preferred)". <br /><br />I don't think 'preference' is involved. The region north of the eastern Y- and mt-DNAs was uninhabited until Q and entourage arrived. Men would have moved ahead of the advancing wave and been the first of the advancing group to meet locals along their southward margin. They would have brought them back to join their Y-DNA Q and mt-DNA X tribes. <br /><br />"These paleo Native Americans become bloodtype O, although their women come from the areas with a high frequency of bloodtype A and B". <br /><br />It is possible that some sort of selection is involved in the O bloodtype of Native Americans. <br /><br />"NO, D and C3 recede back to the South in big numbers to change the looks of all southerners". <br /><br />Actually N goes north to increase the Mongoloid element in the north. <br /><br />"we can change the route and say that yDNA Q passes through North China instead of Baikal area". <br /><br />Wherever it passed it would have been in uninhabited regions to the north of any earlier inhabitants. <br /><br />"we can go back to the theory that Mongoloid traits are not linked with the cold climate but developed in the Chinese heartland, but then again it is not so simple to explain why these traits were passed on to Native Americans and why EDAR mutation is most frequent in Baikal area and America". <br /><br />That is the central problem Eurologist and Onur are unable to explain. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-18432903651366650072013-11-20T04:31:25.293+02:002013-11-20T04:31:25.293+02:00Sorry Dienekes. This is three posts. However I t...Sorry Dienekes. This is three posts. However I think it raises important points. <br /><br />"so in your opinion we have c. 45.000 years ago (in Super-Grandfathers paper it is 34.000 years ago) KMNOPS in Sundaland, and yDNA C/Australoids in Australia and in continental East Asia". <br /><br />Yes. But C3 in East Asia was already differentiating autosomally from C4 in Australia, C5 in South Asia, C2 in Wallacea and C* in South China/SE Asia. And possibly C1 was forming in Japan, although some research suggests it branched off C3 some time more recently. <br /><br />"I suppose that KMNOPS people were negritos at that time". <br /><br />Possibly, but the Negrito phenotype may be a response to selection in tropical jungle. <br /><br /><br /> At the same time, 'African' YDNA D and mtDNA G/D (?) were already in North China". <br /><br />And mt-DNA A and N9, as well as Y-DNA C3. <br /><br />"Then, YDNA P goes to India with mtDNA R through the areas inhabited by ancient South Indians, and from there to Central Asia c. 40.000 years ago". <br /><br />Yes. That combination of haplogroups must have utilised the South Asian environment in a manner the earlier inhabitants did not. My guess is that the boating technology require to cross Wallace's Line enable a more efficient use of rivers and lakes, and even the coast. <br /><br />"There it leaves behind mtDNA R and M and takes along mtDNA X. In Central Asia these people become Caucasoids with bloodtype O". <br /><br />Basically, although R-derived mt-DNA haplogroups are very common west of Altai/Hindu Kush. They must have accompanied Y-DNAs Q and R to start with as they moved north. <br /><br />"While P is in India, NO originates in Yunnan, c. 40.000 years ago". <br /><br />Yes. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-61992987760509805972013-11-20T03:55:26.786+02:002013-11-20T03:55:26.786+02:00"Not all researchers agree with Willerslev..."Not all researchers agree with Willerslev's conclusion of partial Caucasoid ancestry in Native Americans". <br /><br />No, but those researchers are going to be left behind in the dust as new evidence comes to light. <br /><br />"The 0% statement is absolutely ridiculous based both on phenotype and all autosomal DNA analyses carried out, to date". <br /><br />Absolutely. <br /><br />"results of formal admixture tests such as ADMIXTOOLS and MixMapper and haplogroup distributions all support my interpretation". <br /><br />The tools rely on what the researcher assumes to be the 'basic' populations. If those assumptions are incorrect the results will be. <br /><br />"all of them seem to possess 100% of the Amerindian component ... seems to indicate that the Native American sub-race is a racially virtually pure branch of the Mongoloid race". <br /><br />No. What the results indicate is that Native Americans are a racially virtually pure branch of the Native American race. <br /><br />"For most early native Americans, it was decidedly proto-Mongoloids who admixed - not Mongoloids in any traditional or modern sense". <br /><br />So we're back to this meaningless 'proto-Mongoloids' expression. What no-one has come up with is an explanation as to what the term actually means. How did the whole population of 'proto-Mongoloids' become 'modern Mongoloids'? Doesn't make sense. <br /><br />"Mongoloids were already differentiated into northern and southern branches" <br /><br />What is the 'southern branch of the Mongoloids'? I suspect what you mean here is SE Asians, who we know were not Mongoloid at all until some 5-6000 years ago. <br /><br />"The Mal'ta individual cannot be ancestral to Native Americans as he carries Caucasoid haplogroups (Y-DNA hg R and mtDNA hg U) that are lacking in pure Native Americans" <br /><br />We all know that haplogroups are not a close indicator of aDNA. The researchers showed (to my satisfaction at least) that the Mal'ta boy does have a genetic element found in Native Americans but not in East Asians. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-4828148320884224702013-11-19T18:56:50.364+02:002013-11-19T18:56:50.364+02:00Terry, so in your opinion we have c. 45.000 years ...Terry, so in your opinion we have c. 45.000 years ago (in Super-Grandfathers paper it is 34.000 years ago) KMNOPS in Sundaland, and yDNA C/Australoids in Australia and in continental East Asia. I suppose that KMNOPS people were negritos at that time. At the same time, “African” YDNA D and mtDNA G/D (?) were already in North China. Then, YDNA P goes to India with mtDNA R through the areas inhabited by ancient South Indians, and from there to Central Asia c. 40.000 years ago. There it leaves behind mtDNA R and M and takes along mtDNA X. In Central Asia these people become Caucasoids with bloodtype O. <br /><br />While P is in India, NO originates in Yunnan, c. 40.000 years ago. We know that according to ancient finds, people in South China were Negrito and Jomon looking (yDNA D or C?). O starts spreading in China and arrives to the North Asia very quickly. Before the Ice Age NO and O go up to the Baikal area with mtDNA C and A and develop Mongoloid traits together with yDNA C3 and mtDNA B and yDNA D and mtDNA D.<br /><br />Circa 35.000 years ago yDNA Q-M120 brings the Upper Palaeolithic Technique to China and again leaves behind its original women and mixes with women carrying Eastern mtDNA. These Q-M120 people never make it to America. <br /><br />The mainstream Q is heading to Baikal and meets Mongoloid yDNA C3, D and NO people. YDNA Q passes over the earlier inhabitants. Before the onset of the Ice Age, YDNA Q presses on to Beringia and again leaves behind mtDNA X and takes along women carrying D, C and A lines. (I conclude that Eastern women were prettier as they are always preferred).<br /><br />These paleo Native Americans become bloodtype O, although their women come from the areas with a high frequency of bloodtype A and B. NO, D and C3 recede back to the South in big numbers to change the looks of all southerners. <br /><br />If this is not possible, we can change the route and say that yDNA Q passes through North China instead of Baikal area. Q brings the Upper Palaeolithic Technique to China and takes along women carrying D, C and A lines. However, these men do not leave any yDNA trail in China (Q-L53 lines) or any mtDNA X, they just pass through China changing wifes and leaving a new technique to previous inhabitants and press forward to Amur and further to America. <br /><br />If this theory is not working, we can go back to the theory that Mongoloid traits are not linked with the cold climate but developed in the Chinese heartland, but then again it is not so simple to explain why these traits were passed on to Native Americans and why EDAR mutation is most frequent in Baikal area and America.<br /><br />You also say that “the presence of X indicates that the admixture was gradual. And that explains the apparent one third West Eurasian genetic element in Native Americans.“ However, according to admixture analyses, http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/13/127/figure/F6?highres=y , Southern Native Americans do not show any admixture with Western Eurasians or East Asians. If Northern Native American X reflects West Eurasian gene flow, it must be more recent than the ancestry from the first settlers.<br />Kristiinahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02994105875605082112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-11574859324425363842013-11-19T17:32:23.419+02:002013-11-19T17:32:23.419+02:00This comment has been removed by the author.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-15203273820237088612013-11-19T17:31:33.587+02:002013-11-19T17:31:33.587+02:00This comment has been removed by the author.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-37695790957941657922013-11-19T13:44:26.006+02:002013-11-19T13:44:26.006+02:00"...the fact that the Native American Y-chrom...<i>"...the fact that the Native American Y-chromosome haplogroup pool is so limited in diversity while their mtDNA haplogroup pool is much more diverse strongly suggests that they descend from a small group of males who admixed with a lot of Mongoloid females, and almost only Mongoloid females looking at their mtDNA haplogroups, during their migration towards the Americas. So their mtDNA haplogroups represent their autosomal genetics way more than their Y-chromosome haplogroups do. In fact, it is very likely that that the original Y-DNA hg Q-carrying ancestors of Native Americans could not leave more than 0% of their genome to present-day Native Americans."</i><br /><br />Onur,<br /><br />I agree with everything in this except:<br /><br />(i) For most <i>early</i> native Americans, it was decidedly <i>proto</i>-Mongoloids who admixed - not Mongoloids in any traditional or modern sense.<br /><br />(ii) The 0% statement is absolutely ridiculous based both on phenotype and all autosomal DNA analyses carried out, to date.eurologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03440019181278830033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-14576902491488166462013-11-19T02:04:59.393+02:002013-11-19T02:04:59.393+02:00"Terry, the fact that the Native American Y-c..."Terry, the fact that the Native American Y-chromosome haplogroup pool is so limited in diversity while their mtDNA haplogroup pool is much more diverse strongly suggests that they descend from a small group of males who admixed with a lot of Mongoloid females, and almost only Mongoloid females looking at their mtDNA haplogroups, during their migration towards the Americas". <br /><br />But the presence of X indicates that the admixture was gradual. And that explains the apparent one third West Eurasian genetic element in Native Americans. <br /><br />"component that peaks in East Asians at low K's before the appearance of the Amerindian component does not equal to the Mongoloid race, as it is more representative of Asian Mongoloids, who are more derived than Native Americans" <br /><br />Surely Asian Mongoloids simply appear to be 'more derived' because they are less admixed with other populations. Or do you insist that the apparent admixture mentioned in Dienekes' blog here is exactly that: apparent? <br /><br />"So it does not necessarily indicate non-Mongoloid admixture in Native Americans". <br /><br />Am I to understand that you absolutely dismiss all these statements: <br /><br />"24,000-yr-old Siberian Mal'ta person geneticall similar to native amer and west eurasians. No east asian" <br /><br />And: <br /><br />"Native Americans formed by an admixture of east Asian ancestors and the ancestors of western Eurasians" <br /><br />And Michael Balter's comments: <br /><br />"His DNA shows close ties to those of today's Native Americans. Yet he apparently descended not from East Asians, but from people who had lived in Europe or western Asia. The finding suggests that about a third of the ancestry of today's Native Americans can be traced to 'western Eurasia,' with the other two-thirds coming from eastern Asia" <br /><br />And: <br /><br />"One expected relationship was missing from the picture: The boy's genome showed no connection to modern East Asians. DNA studies of living people strongly suggest that East Asians—perhaps Siberians, Chinese, or Japanese—make up the major part of Native American ancestors. So how could the boy be related to living Native Americans, but not to East Asians?" <br /><br />And again: <br /><br />"The Mal'ta child represents a population of Native American ancestors who moved into Siberia, probably from Europe or west Asia. Then, sometime after the Mal'ta boy died, this population mixed with East Asians. The new, admixed population eventually made its way to the Americas. Exactly when and where the admixture happened is not clear, Willerslev said. But the deep roots in Europe or west Asia could help explain features of some Paleoamerican skeletons and of Native American DNA today". <br /><br />???? terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-38631676712617528912013-11-18T14:58:03.848+02:002013-11-18T14:58:03.848+02:00This comment has been removed by the author.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-24718300077292684242013-11-18T14:53:49.918+02:002013-11-18T14:53:49.918+02:00This comment has been removed by the author.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-79189932394115185712013-11-18T09:00:56.122+02:002013-11-18T09:00:56.122+02:00Sorry. A further comment. German wrote some time...Sorry. A further comment. German wrote some time back: <br /><br />"the growing amount of evidence in favor of admixture as the driving force behind observable genetic variation". <br /><br />And such admixture is a fundamental assumption in the wave theory of evolution. Evolution is a product of the movement of various waves of genetic change through populations. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-33275959341712705752013-11-18T07:20:14.502+02:002013-11-18T07:20:14.502+02:00"I think that I am increasingly of the opinio..."I think that I am increasingly of the opinion that Australoids should be linked to yDNA C and mtDNA B" <br /><br />There is virtually no B in Australia. And the C there is neither C2 nor C3, but C4. C's diversification is obviously very ancient. B is closely associated with the Austronesian expansion into the Pacific, along with C2 from Southern Wallacea, although B was possibly originally 'Australoid' early in its existence in South China/Vietnam. <br /><br />"Mongoloids in Eastern Eurasia and America to yDNA MNOPS and D and mtDNA M". <br /><br />MNOPS as 'Mongoloid' doesn't fit at all. M and S are definitely not Mongoloid, and neither are the closely related K1, K2 and K3. Of the other two haplogroups within the clade the P-derived R cannot be considered Mongolid either. I believe its relation Q is Mongoloid only through later introgression. NO is the only 'Mongoloid' Y-DNA haplogroup within the group. <br /><br />"On the basis of this, it seems that the Upper Palaeolithic technique came to North China with yDNA D and NO". <br /><br />I don't think so. By the Upper Paleolithic both these haplogroups were already resident in East Asia. <br /><br />"it is quite plausible that modern humans migrated into northern China from western Eurasia during this time period" <br /><br />NO for a start is almost certainly not from 'western Eurasia' at all. It is related to the KMNOPS of Sundaland although perhaps P formed from this haplogroup somewhere further west in South Asia. As for D, I suspect it had been isolated in eastern Tibet/western China for a long time. That leaves just the P-derived haplogroups R and Q as forming any possible movement from western Eurasia. <br /><br />"I disagree with your statement that 'his produced a population completely homozygous for the EDAR370A mutation (and presumanly other mutations). It contained Y-DNAs C3, D and NO', in that this could not have produced a situation in which EDAR370A is more common in America than in areas with mostly C3, D and NO lines". <br /><br />How do you conclude that the 'EDAR370A is more common in America than in areas with mostly C3, D and NO lines'? These three haplogroups all contain a very high proportion of the mutation in most regions where they are present. The only regions this is not so is where it is obvious there has been considerable admixture with non-Mongoloid populations. <br /><br />"If Q came to Northeast Asia only after NO, D and C3, I do not understand why only Q and C3b would have made it to America". <br /><br />Q passed to the north of the existing East Asia population, picking up only the female lines. C3 managed to join just the later stages. This is demonstrated by your comment, 'I see that only Q is in the Baikal area and only C3 is on the same North Eastern path'. <br /><br />"while O is spreading in the south and NO probably survived in the area ranging from West China to Japan, as well as taking a refuge in Tibet, Yunnan and Sichuan". <br /><br />I strongly suspect that NO originated 'in Tibet, Yunnan and Sichuan' and spread respectively north and south from there after adopting the Upper Paleolithic and then developing the East Asian Neolithic. <br /><br />"can we see this Australoid vs. Mongoloid division in Admixture analyses?" <br /><br />We can in the Pacific. In fact such admixture is almost universally accepted. <br /><br />"Tongan and Samoan is SP15, and in this column, 4/9 consists of Pacific-specific ancestry, and, for the rest, Tongans and Samoans resemble in particular Beijing Chinese cluster with a small amount of South Asian ancestry". <br /><br />yes. terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-51565875611640151332013-11-16T16:26:33.503+02:002013-11-16T16:26:33.503+02:00Correction: when I referred to Samoan and Tongan a...Correction: when I referred to Samoan and Tongan admixture components, I was looking at the wrong column! Tongan and Samoan is SP15, and in this column, 4/9 consists of Pacific-specific ancestry, and, for the rest, Tongans and Samoans resemble in particular Beijing Chinese cluster with a small amount of South Asian ancestry. I propose that yDNA C and mtDNA B were first to reach Beijing area, and O arrived c. 30.000 years ago. Then O1 developed and spread on the East Cost of China and at some point started settling in the southern islands.Kristiinahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02994105875605082112noreply@blogger.com